Why not become a lifetime supporting member of the site with a one-time donation of any amount? Your donation entitles you to a ton of additional benefits, including access to exclusive discounts and downloads, the ability to enter monthly free software drawings, and a single non-expiring license key for all of our programs.

You must sign up here before you can post and access some areas of the site. Registration is totally free and confidential.

Couldnt get the crash to occur again.. the dialog that showed was the "Run As" dialog where i could give it permission to run as administrator. It doesn't crash any more, but doesn't seem to install any context menu extension even when i give it permission. Not that this bothers me as i love to drag+drop files anyway instead of right-clicking.

Yeah, I need to dig into the Explorer menu item code. It was hell getting alpha transparency to work properly for Vista, and I am not sure if I can be bummed figuring out the proper way to do it on XP (I read it involves ownerdrawing and all that jazz). Instead I might pick a non alpha-version of the icon for the XP variety.

Also, hrm... do you run with any sort of special settings, Cranioscopircal? I can't help but notice how Uploaded: gets clipped a little and everything in general seems to be a bit bigger, and I wonder how I can prevent that from happening.

Also, hrm... do you run with any sort of special settings, Cranioscopircal? I can't help but notice how Uploaded: gets clipped a little and everything in general seems to be a bit bigger, and I wonder how I can prevent that from happening.

No more than setting the properties I want through the XP Display Properties/Settings/Advanced Properties (I use the WindowsXP style).As I mentioned, in the intial dialogue box the fonts are a tad to large for the buttons. Virtually all else that I have handles this. I can't tell you why though

Just a warning regarding a bug in JottiQ v0.9.2 as well as v0.9.3: I accidentally left some debugging code in. This causes any files that have been previously uploaded to Jotti to always display the results for the same virus infected file which is not the file in you have selected. (The scan result in question possesses a particular oddity needing me to hardcode it to test the usecase properly... and which I then forgot to remove after confirming it was handled properly. )

Test away. The installer is a bit of an experiment, and I don't think I whipped it completely into listening to me just yet, but it should get the job done. It's a bit of a fat-arse too, so I apologize for that. I am not sure what I can do to change that though.

After christmas, I intend to focus on the UI and texts and such that I asked peoples opinions on before. I just haven't gotten around to incorporating those details yet.

The ReadMe says stuff about right-clicking and elevating and stuff.. but I forgot to adjust the ReadMe after I had to take that stuff out for now because it had some flaws I noticed at the last minute. The current version seems to always want to elevate because I have an admin account, but maybe someone has a really limited user account they can test with for me.)

Readme.txt (excerpts once more)

JottiQv0.9.5 (2010-12-25)

REQUEST TO TESTERS: Please test _everything_! Things I need tested in order of priority:

Added: Support for Current-User and All-Users installations for the shell context menu. In essence, this means UAC will no longer be needed if you install it for your user only. This determination is made based on the existence of a 'MachineInstallation' file in the directory the executable is located. Added: An actual installer! When double-clicked, it performs an installation that affects your user only. However, if you take the opportunity to right-click and select 'Run as Administrator', it will do an installation where it affects all users on your machine. (And when I write 'it affects', I refer to the shell extension, as all other application settings are per-user.) A plain .7z archive will continue to exist for those who like it, however. Fixed: Shell extension failed to register if it was in a path with spaces inside of it. Now it works. Fixed: Windows XP no longer has a butt-ugly clipped shield image when it needs to elevate to install. Fixed: Various texts and the likes should no longer be cut off when running at more interesting configurations involving bigger fonts. Added: Mnemonics were added to the Settings screen to improve keyboard accessibility. Fixed: Changing the shell extensions installed state no longer rushes through the affair; it now waits for actions to complete so the Installer doesn't vomit during the Uninstall. Semi-Fixed: At one point during my own testing on my XP machine, JottiQ crashed after I clicked a link in the Privacy Agreement screen. I suspect it involves Firefox demanding an upgrade before continuing; but I have not been able to reproduce it. So from now on, it should fail gracefully and spit out an error. If anyone sees this error, I would be very interested in finding out what it is and whether it is a common error that needs further looking-into.

KNOWN ISSUES------------1) The installer can only delete settings for the current user. This is not something that I have any feasible way of changing, although I do welcome any and all suggestions on the topic. This includes the shell context menu option.

2) The (un)installer does not detect if JottiQ is currently running and offer offer to close it first. Hopefully will fix at some point in the future.

3) The installer component 'Explorer Integration affects All Users' determines the creation of the 'MachineInstallation' file. By default it is off, allowing every user to determine the presence of a file context menu for themselves (and also avoiding nasty UAC dialogs in the process.) Once this file is present, one needs Administrator rights in order to turn the file context menu on or off.

Given point 1), if you install to make JottiQ available to multiple users, it is recommended to install with this setting turned on so that any registry pollution stays at a minimum. (Unless of course you are willing to manually turn off the file context menu for every single user beforehand.)

4) The uninstaller may tell you to reboot. This is because explorer probably still has the shell extension in use, and killing explorer and restarting it is a very user-unfriendly task. As such, postponing the deletion till reboot time is the user-friendliest alternative.

Setup works perfectly for me.. installed it and shell extension -- queuing items via shell extension worked perfectly even when dialog was already on screen.Shell extension works here on WinXp Pro x64.

i still dont like the fact that the menu is not going to be fully visible for people without big screens.changing some of the menu icons+labels to just small icons would fix.or as i suggested earlier moving the per-item ones to bottom.

also, i think a right-click for an item and choosing "perform a google search for this filename" would also be nice.

I gave this a long hard thought actually. Most applications nowadays do not do that anymore. It seems kinda pointless - if you want to 'start' an app, you likely don't want to remove it. I know that back in the day, I personally got annoyed as hell when I misclicked and it went 'want to go uninstall?'

Were I to compare an uninstall to a stupid Readme, I think the latter would get more (intentional) attention than the uninstaller ever would. But maybe I'm just an oddball in that regard.

* worstje is still annoyed by the by about the fact that shell extensions can't be properly told to be unloaded to explorer.exe. :-(

i still dont like the fact that the menu is not going to be fully visible for people without big screens.changing some of the menu icons+labels to just small icons would fix.or as i suggested earlier moving the per-item ones to bottom.

also, i think a right-click for an item and choosing "perform a google search for this filename" would also be nice.

I'll give it a long hard thought. I like the idea - just not sure I like the implied consequences. Why google, why not bing? Make it configurable? Why not add multiple search engines? Why not directly index into some virus/security related sites?

Maybe I am overthinking it, but as you write above: the UI isn't fully visible atm, and I need to remove some labels and re-organize as it is. If I add features, I have to wonder about more things. And drastic UI changes aren't up for grabs simply due to the deadline at this point, so I am focusing on small and really managable and low-impact stuff right now. The sort of feature that has a cascade of other feature requests following almost as a direct consequence... it's the kind of slippery slope that are all over the streets outside my house already.

I'll give it a long hard thought. I like the idea - just not sure I like the implied consequences. Why google, why not bing? Make it configurable? Why not add multiple search engines? Why not directly index into some virus/security related sites?

any of these solutions would be fine -- no reason to use google. im just suggesting that a common thing someone will want to do is search web for filename and it would be nice to make that easy.

Nice idea. Not sure how to implement it though, as .NET gives such relatively low-tech things little importance, and as might be imagined, I don't have 24/4 to work on it the coming few days. I gotta scramble as-is to get JottiQ ready for its final NANY v1.0.0 release.

worstje, to fix number 2 on your Known Issues list, have a look at AppMutex in the fine Inno Setup helpfile. There's also the CheckForMutexes support function, might you want to check it from some Code.And here is a way to create it in C# (for if you didn't know).

Just tested JottiQ 0.9.5 on Vista 32 bit.Guess Vista doesn't like the shell extension, because it's not showing in the context menu of Explorer, or at least not for the files I tried it with. I'll do an uninstall/reinstall to see if I accidentally unchecked that option. [...] And that didn't help a bit, neither when checking the 'Explorer Integration affects All Users' option, so that might need a fix. Vista's UAC is turned off, btw. This worked fine on 2 of my Win7 x64 setups, one with UAC in it's default setting and one with UAC turned off.

Also tested JottiQ 0.9.5 on WinXP 32 bit, but it has the same issue with the context menu as Vista 32 bit has, so it's most likely that that little bugger (the shellextension that is) doesn't behave as it should.The advantage is that it doesn't want to reboot after a successful uninstall

Nice idea. Not sure how to implement it though, as .NET gives such relatively low-tech things little importance, and as might be imagined, I don't have 24/4 to work on it the coming few days. I gotta scramble as-is to get JottiQ ready for its final NANY v1.0.0 release.

I can't remember the exact namespace now, but I've easily implemented detection of all running processes in past projects - just a few lines of code. Must be easily found on search engines, or I wouldn't have been able to do it

worstje, to fix number 2 on your Known Issues list, have a look at AppMutex in the fine Inno Setup helpfile. There's also the CheckForMutexes support function, might you want to check it from some Code.And here is a way to create it in C# (for if you didn't know).

Yeah I know of it. I already use OpenThreadWaitHandle or something along that name (Winapi: CreateEvent) for my single-instance functionality, but it doesn't appear as if Inno supports checking for such a thing... which is a rather annoying thing, I might say. I might have to add a mutex too, but then I'll have '3' things meant for single instance stuff: Mutex, CreateEvent and the COM IDropTarget local-server I use to handle the shell extension.

Just tested JottiQ 0.9.5 on Vista 32 bit.Guess Vista doesn't like the shell extension, because it's not showing in the context menu of Explorer, or at least not for the files I tried it with. I'll do an uninstall/reinstall to see if I accidentally unchecked that option. [...] And that didn't help a bit, neither when checking the 'Explorer Integration affects All Users' option, so that might need a fix. Vista's UAC is turned off, btw. This worked fine on 2 of my Win7 x64 setups, one with UAC in it's default setting and one with UAC turned off.

Finally, a Vista user! I've been trying like crazy to have someone test on Vista. I am surprised it does not work on Vista - it works on XP, it works on 7, you'd expect it to deal fine with the halfway point. Is it the 32-bit or 64-bit variety, or had you got the ability to try on both OSes?

If you run JottiQ and use the Settings window to enable/disable the shell extension, does it add a shield to the OK button? (Or when clicking OK ask for elevation for that matter.) If it does, you are using it for the entire machine. For now though, let's avoid any and all UAC issues and focus on the 'explorer integration affects all users' setting being turned OFF as it is by default. (If you simply extract the .7z archive, that is the 'mode' you end up using.)

Assuming you can't get the shell extension to activate through the Settings screen either, open up a dosbox, browse to the JottiQ directory, and type:

(If you've got 64-bit, you'll want to do the same for the other dll file as well.) It will pop up that it succeeded, or it will throw an error in your face. If it does the latter, I'd be very interested in the error in question.

Also tested JottiQ 0.9.5 on WinXP 32 bit, but it has the same issue with the context menu as Vista 32 bit has, so it's most likely that that little bugger (the shellextension that is) doesn't behave as it should.The advantage is that it doesn't want to reboot after a successful uninstall

The shell extension _should_ work on XP. I've tested it to death myself. Can you explain what you did exactly? Maybe something else went wrong somehow.

I can't remember the exact namespace now, but I've easily implemented detection of all running processes in past projects - just a few lines of code. Must be easily found on search engines, or I wouldn't have been able to do it

I'll look into it then; if it is as simple as you say it is worth digging into. Some things I expected to be simple as pie ended up taking full days though, so you can see why I am hesitant in committing to the idea.

Hm, tested on Vista (x86) again, but still no joy with the context menu. Even the regsvr32 jqcm32.dll doesn;'t work: 'Can't load module JQcm32.dll' (but then in Dutch: "Kan module 'JQcm32.dll" niet laden.").One peculiarity maybe: The Win7 x64 systems I tested JottiQ on, both have VS2010 installed, and on both WinXP and Vista I didn't have even .NET 4.0 installed until it wouldn't load JottiQ so I had to install that using Windows Update. I installed the plain 4.0 Client Profile thing, but it might still be missing the VC++ runtime (as you mentioned in a PM).Also trying to enable this feature from the settings menu doesn't give a shielded OK button and doesn't enable the context menu entry, but seeing that regsvr32 fails explains that I guess.

On the 'single instance' issues, Inno Setup does natively support checking for a Mutex, and with a small add-on dll, can also check for a process name or windows title. Maybe that's enough?

I'll dig up the code to add .NET 4.0 and VC++ runtime to the installer today and post or link it here.

Ah yeah, that must be it. It needs the VC runtime and .NET framework v4. I am pretty sure I compiled for the Client Profile, although I might be wrong, and will check it at some point later. I don't compile my things statically out of performance considerations. Just to have the links here:

Just re-registered the DLL after installing VC++2010 using my test-installer, and it ran just fine. I now have a contextmenu item in Explorer. Would you want to use languages besides English in the installer? (the script I started with has German beside English, and it can be removed or expanded to some extra languages (nl?), but it would take some extra work, but I don't mind, just tell me your preference(s))In the meantime also tested the 'Enable/Disable context menu option from settings', and that works just fine, both to Enable and Disable.

If you can provide me with your Inno script I'll add the snippets to enable the Download and Install.

Further testing in Server 2003 x86 and Server 2008R2 (x64) after this post and a cup of coffee